Speeding fine -41 in a 30 - wrong roads on NIP?

[colin1096]

I received a notice of intended prosecution for doing 41 in a 30 zone. I am not disputing that I was wrong and will pay or do the course. 

 

On the nip it says that I was travelling west bound between two particular roads , when I was travelling east bound between another set of roads .

 

The police with the radar gun were hiding on the opposite side of the road in a bus stop.

Just wondered when I send this form back admitting I was the driver I should point this out to them 

[Manxman in exile]

You can point it out but I wouldn't expect it to achieve anything unless the error is so gross that they decide to drop it out of embarrassment.

 

I think the general rule is that this sort of error only helps you if you are put at a disadvantage as a result of it.  But as you say:

 

1 hour ago, colin1096 said:

... I am not disputing that I was wrong and will pay or do the course. 

 

On the noip it says that I was travelling west bound between two particular roads , when I was travelling east bound between another set of roads ...

 

You seem to know exactly what has happened and have not been disadvantaged.  So I think you are stuck - but see if anybody else has any better ideas.  And it doesn't help you if they were "hiding".

 

Make sure you return your nomination in time.

 

(Just to check - if you are the Registered Keeper, was it served within 14 days?)

Edited July 31, 2021 by Manxman in exile

[Man in the middle]

Agree with Manxman. The NIP has to show "...the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed." 

 

As Manxman points out, the basis of the NIP is to provide you with sufficient information so as you are not disadvantaged. If you want to defend the matter on the basis that the NIP did not meet the requirements (of S1 of the Road Traffic Offenders' Act) you will have to have the matter heard in court. You will be required to give evidence and so be liable to cross examination. You will be questioned on the disadvantage you suggest the error caused you. You are unlikely to convince the court that the NIP was deficient enough to provide a defence (especially as you know exactly where the offence occurred) and failure will cost you the thick end of £1,000.

 

You should be offered a course for that speed provided you have not done one for an offence which occurred in the three years prior to this one.

[SpeedyCBR1100]

Exactly the same thing happened to me a few years ago.  I was summoned for speeding on the A127 when it should have been the A12.

 

I went into court and the charge was read.  The police officer was already in the witness box and he told the CPS solicitor there was a problem and he told the court.  The clerk then re-read the offence with the correct roads.  I simply said "with respect, that isn't the charge I was summoned here to face."  The clerk looked at the bench who looked at each other.  The CPS solicitor then stood and said "the summons is faulty and is withdrawn."

 

And that was it.

Edited July 31, 2021 by SpeedyCBR1100
Bad spacing

[colin1096]

Thanks,  I have put a letter with a copy of the notice of prosecution explaining that I was not travelling on that road. I wouldn't want to go to court over a technical error I'm case I lost. Will just do the course. Thanks everyone for your advice.

[Manxman in exile]

Wait and see what they offer you then.  As I said above, if they have made a mistake it is possible that they might decide not to proceed out of embarrassment, even if the error is not such as to disadvantage you.  They did in SpeedyCBR1100's case.  You might get lucky too.

[Man in the middle]

The difference between your case and Speedy's is that his involved an error on the summons. Yours is on the NIP. The two are judged at different levels, but nonetheless I am surprised that the court did not permit an amendment to the summons. As an aside, minor motoring offences are not commenced by way of summons now. They begin with a "Single Justice Procedure Notice" (sent to the defendant) together with a "Written Charge" (sent to the court).

 

There is a different strategy you could consider. Before you return the Section 172 notice providing the driver's details, you could ask for "any photographs that will help identify the driver." They don't have to provide them but usually will. They don't usually help identify the driver (especially those taken from the rear) but it is a way of avoiding asking for "evidence" to which you are not entitled at this stage. When you have them you can confirm the location and if the NIP and S172 request state it incorrectly you could reply saying that your vehicle was not in the location mentioned at the relevant time.

 

This is a risky business. Unless the police drop the matter out of "embarrassment" you will face a charge of "Failing to Provide Driver's Details" - an offence which carries six points. Whether you are convicted of that depends very much on all the circumstances and it's impossible to give a view here. But it might be worth a try. It is not your job to second guess what the police really mean when they ask who was driving your car at 12 noon in the High Street. You could give it some thought.

[SpeedyCBR1100]

You're absolutely correct.  I was stopped by an officer who actually looked like a pig.  He tried to give me a verbal NIP but couldn't' quite remember it so helped him out.  (I am an ex Police Officer.)  There was therefore no need for a written follow up.

 

I did actually guess that he would screw something else up and so it proved.

[colin1096]

Thanks for your advice . I returned the notice of prosecution form saying I was the driver and put a letter in saying it was the wrong road. Today I received another NIP with different reference number on it but this time with the correct road and the same time and date and speed as the first one . I am a bit confused do I send this back aswell and hope they don't fine me twice . 

[BazzaS]

What date of alleged offence is on the second NIP, and

a) when is it dated,

b) when is it postmarked.

(I note it was received 5/8/21)

[colin1096]

First letter offence 11.25am 27th July received 29th July sent 28th juky

 

Second letter offence 11.25am 27th July dated 03/08/21 received today

 

Roads have changed on the 2 letters

[BazzaS]

So, within the 14 day time limit.

[colin1096]

Yes

[Argyll]

Here in Scotland a few years ago the local council misnamed a road. They discovered the error after a year or so. The police had to contact every person caught speeding on that road and cancel any prosecution. Whether they did or not is another matter.